Analog Pitching: Walks

[Heroesandvillains]

Personally, walks are not an issue for me. I'm on HOF, and so far have been issuing a very realistic number per game.

Some people on OS have already been discussing amongst themselves having too much analog control. So, I figured I'd open this up so the entire community could have a back and forth on the subject, keeping in mind, it's no secret that SCEA may or may not patch difficulty this year.

My take on it is simple, and down to the numbers. Last year, I used the Classic pitching mechanic. In my limited time with analog, I find the relative accuracy to be nearly identical for me: 60% strikes. On top of it, it's really fun.

For instance, after pitching a gem with Dan Haren (7 IP, 5 H, 9 K...2BB total from the bullpen), I started my second game using Jared Weaver, and lead off issuing back to back first inning walks.

There's a lot of diversity here. For the most part, I'm giving up 5 walks per. Thanks to aces on good days, my overall walks, so far, are just over 3.5...Granted, it's early, so who knows where I'll be after my stick skills improve.

I'd like to know more about the hidden sensitivity slider (which is designed to keep people from simply mastering the system), and whether or not it's impact is greater with worse pitchers, etc. In turn, I'd also like to know how some guys AREN'T passing out walks (fortunately, not an issue for me at all...not in the slightest). But, all in all, my eyes tell me this mechanic is a keeper, regardless of how SCEA handles patching/not patching/ or tweaking its design for future installments.

What do the rest of you think?

[metal134]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

I'm not seeing walks with analog. The problem isn't having too much control, the problem is that when I miss, it's still a strike agreat deal of the time. I had 1 walk in 20 innings with anaolg, and using classic, with the same exact settings, I issued 10 in the next 20. Small sample size, but overwhelming difference.

[nomo17k]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

Just adding to the discussion another perspective. I'm playing many CPU vs CPU games for slider adjustments (as with daiyoung; see the CPU vs CPU thread in the slider forum), and in this mode (which difficulty levels should not affect), I'm seeing less BB per game per team than the MLB average (2.53 vs 3.33; daiyoung sees a similar trend so the trend is really likely to exist) after playing like 30 games so far.

This year's game perhaps has a tendency to produce less walks in general. However in terms of strike %, it's about 64% (game) to 63% (real life) in my experiment so far, so it doesn't seem like there are too many strikes thrown.

I'm thinking of how to adjust sliders to produce more walks.

[metal134]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

Well I've noticed while playing RTTS, and I just chalked it up to the fact that I was facing minor leaugers, that guys swing at a lot of stuff out of the zone. Overall, I'm giving up a little over 3 walks per 9 innnings and I could be giving up a lot more because guys have swung at a lot of bad 3 ball pitches and either fouled it off or hit weak grounders.

[nomo17k]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

Well I've noticed while playing RTTS, and I just chalked it up to the fact that I was facing minor leaugers, that guys swing at a lot of stuff out of the zone. Overall, I'm giving up a little over 3 walks per 9 innnings and I could be giving up a lot more because guys have swung at a lot of bad 3 ball pitches and either fouled it off or hit weak grounders.

Playing in minors may be a factor but I do think the devs adjusted the AI so that they chase more bad pitches out of the zone, which I think is a great move in general. Last year I felt CPU were too well disciplined, trying to sim a pitcher who lived off offspeed stuff out of the zone for whiff. But that change might be affecting the BB numbers to be lower.

[Jgainsey]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

This is somewhat of a guess, but I don't think I started issuing a realistic amount of walks until I became fairly comfortable with analog pitching. The first batch of games I played in the demo were very low in walks. It wasn't that I was pitching great, it was just that most of the time when I missed my spot it was because I went straight up the middle on the stick. As a result, these mistakes found the strike zone more often than they were missing.

As I became better with the analog pitching, I was hitting my spots most of the time, or at least winding up fairly close to my ball marker. This did two things, my walks went up to realistic levels and so did my strike outs. But those results seems to be very dependent on my pitching style. From what I can tell, it doesn't seem like the game punishes you enough for missing your spot, especially when you miss right up the middle. This is all on HOF for me, btw.

From what I've seen so far(Disclaimer: Small Sample Size), it doesn't seem like the user is punished enough for missing their spots with the stick. Especially when the miss is by a fairly significant margin, like when you're trying to aim just outside the strike zone and you accidentally push straight up. In this scenario, one of two things should be happening more often. The pitch should either miss it's intended target by a wide margin, or if it winds up in the strike zone, the cpu hitter should be taking advantage of this mistake at a higher rate.

I think we can probably solve some of the problem by lowering the human pitching sliders, but I'm not sure if that will do the trick. Maybe Legend pitching is the answer, but I don't know, I haven't tried it yet. Legend pitching scares me...

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

Just adding to the discussion another perspective. I'm playing many CPU vs CPU games for slider adjustments (as with daiyoung; see the CPU vs CPU thread in the slider forum), and in this mode (which difficulty levels should not affect), I'm seeing less BB per game per team than the MLB average (2.53 vs 3.33; daiyoung sees a similar trend so the trend is really likely to exist) after playing like 30 games so far.

This year's game perhaps has a tendency to produce less walks in general. However in terms of strike %, it's about 64% (game) to 63% (real life) in my experiment so far, so it doesn't seem like there are too many strikes thrown.

I'm thinking of how to adjust sliders to produce more walks.

This I agree with. It's very obvious this year that:

A. Strike percentages are greatly improved from the CPU. I've tracked 66% so far, but I'm chasing a tad too much. Again, this is a vast improvement.

B. Strike percentages on 2-0, 3-0, and 3-1 are noticeably up. I don't even need to track it to see it. It's obvious from the get-go.

Point B tells me that strike frequency won't necessarily improve this...though, more balls lead to less confidence and stamina, thus resulting in the possibilty of more walks.

I wonder if consistency will take those corner pitches (ones on the black in hitter's counts) out of zone a little with less accurate pitchers? In years past, it did.

Again, I don't want to de-rail the thread, so let's keep this on Analog...maybe a new thread would be better for overall CPU logic.

Mainly, with a patch possibly in the works for the new controls, I think it's important to have out voices heard. Analog control has been brought up, so I figured, let's share our opinions on it before/if at all SCEA implements a tweak to the system.

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

JGainsey, I see what you're saying on 'not being punished enough' for missing your spots, but I need to point out:

I am getting plenty punished otherwise. I've already given up 9+ runs three times.

I also agree that my walks increased the more comfortable I became with the system.

I just hope if SCEA does make missing your spots more punishable, that they come more in the form of walks or balls, in turn deminishing pitcher confidence, rather than inflating CPU hits/run production/meatballs. My stats are great so far.

A tweak resulting in anything other than this would be a step backwards in my opinion. Though, at the moment, I like it in it's current state, with no patch. I also hope if there has to be one, that they manage to leave my results with aces alone, and only implement it to effect pitchers with worse control ratings.

[Jgainsey]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

Yeah, I'm very happy with the results I've been seeing too. And even though I mentioned how the cpu maybe doesn't punish the user enough in my last post, it certainly hasn't affected my stats. In fact, as far as I can tell, the game seems like it's doing a great job of balancing things out.

There are plenty of meatballs that hitters don't take advantage of in real life, so it's not like the current system is any less realistic just because the ball goes down the middle when I accidentally go straight up on the stick.

Just so I'm being clear, I am very happy with analog pitching in it's current state, and I would definitely be a little leery of any potential changes.

[nomo17k]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

Actually, swaldo did an interesting experiment in the impression thread. He basically keeps pitching weak fastball down the middle and see how CPU hits againt that predictable pitch sequence and location:

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...post2042196918

Not sure what to take away, is > .400 bad enough to call punishment, etc. But CPU does hit better, compared to .260 - .270 which is the league ave.

Also one thing about "not hitting the spot." It's actually not as easy a concept I think. Say you wanted to pitch low away, but the actual pitch ended up high and in. You are missing the spot, but depending on the context, this can be a good thing. CPU doesn't know (not supposed to know) where you intended to pitch to begin with. So in that case, what does missing the spot mean? As for pitch down the middle, there is a bit of same thing. Since it's such a great pitch to hit, most hitters don't expect to get one, and some pitchers talk about how they can sometimes sneak them past the hitters successfully.

[Snake.Plissken]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

I think lowering the pitcher control slider might be the key. I lowered mine 2 notches, and for my reliever to throw some pitches well, I had to go a decent amount below the yellow line (not just like a sliver). Breaking balls were pretty challenging to throw especially with the added danger of hanging as it seemed like his release point was off. Also, hitting my spots on the way didn't ensure a well placed pitch either. His BB/9 rating was just under the halfway point so it made sense to not be able to locate well consistently.

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

I think lowering the pitcher control slider might be the key. I lowered mine 2 notches, and for my reliever to throw some pitches well, I had to go a decent amount below the yellow line (not just like a sliver). Breaking balls were pretty challenging to throw especially with the added danger of hanging as it seemed like his release point was off. Also, hitting my spots on the way didn't ensure a well placed pitch either. His BB/9 rating was just under the halfway point so it made sense to not be able to locate well consistently.

My experience in the past says that the control slider does not directly influence balls. Though it can have an impact, it also has an impact on meatballs...nearly canceling eachother out. Not to mention, raising the hitters batting average, which is typically not ideal for those looking to walk more hitters...as walks in themselves lower confidence, which as a result, already increases a hitters batting average.

I have not tested it this year though. As I said earlier, walks aren't a problem for me (pitching wise).

This may work for some, however. Thanks for the suggestion man. Definitely worth trying for those in need.

[RoyalBoyle78]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

I'm not seeing walks with analog. The problem isn't having too much control, the problem is that when I miss, it's still a strike agreat deal of the time. I had 1 walk in 20 innings with anaolg, and using classic, with the same exact settings, I issued 10 in the next 20. Small sample size, but overwhelming difference.

Wow really, I mean no offense to you, but I think guys are fibbing about what level there playing on , I'm on also and I had games where I could not hit my spots at all. So walks are very much there.

[Snake.Plissken]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

My experience in the past says that the control slider does not directly influence balls. Though it can have an impact, it also has an impact on meatballs...nearly canceling eachother out. Not to mention, raising the hitters batting average, which is typically not ideal for those looking to walk more hitters...as walks in themselves lower confidence, which as a result, already increases a hitters batting average.

I have not tested it this year though. As I said earlier, walks aren't a problem for me (pitching wise).

This may work for some, however. Thanks for the suggestion man. Definitely worth trying for those in need.

I would agree with you if the was 10. It seems like some sliders are quite a bit different this year. For example, I was a solid hits 0 guy but I tried it this year and it cripples offenses. I didn't notice throwing more meatballs with the pitcher control lowered, it was just harder to hit my spots.

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: Analog Pitching: Walks

I would agree with you if the was 10. It seems like some sliders are quite a bit different this year. For example, I was a solid hits 0 guy but I tried it this year and it cripples offenses. I didn't notice throwing more meatballs with the pitcher control lowered, it was just harder to hit my spots.

Thanks for the explanation. If I'm in need, I'll try it.

Interesting that this would change, if in fact it has. I'm not doubting you, I'm just saying I haven't touched any sliders yet.